Jump to content

Vavra/Henderson/Westburg vs. Odor/Mateo/Urias


Frobby

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Morgan423 said:

This is where I see Mateo in the end going forward, if he can't improve with the bat. 

An insanely valuable utility guy who still starts all over the place four, maybe five times a week, giving regular weekly or biweekly rest games to several starters, to keep everyone fresh. 

A guy with potentially elite defensive skills at several positions with some practice/repetition, and who will be constantly using that speed to cause headaches for other teams whenever he gets on... it does add quite a bit of value (that offensive stats tend not to look at) when opponents are, in practical terms, giving up a double a large percentage of the time they allow him to reach first base.      

Why would Mateo start anywhere but SS? He doesn’t need to play all over the place when he’s the best defensive SS. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, SilverRocket said:

I have some worry about Mateo being the same defensively in a utility role. His defense last year was not at this level, which makes me think it's the everyday reps at the same position that have gotten him the consistency he has now. He's on pace for 2.5-3.5 WAR. Shortstops like that don't grow on trees. When his singles all become doubles, he's better offensively than his numbers look.

I would look to move Urias, or use him as the utility player since he can play three infield positions. I would feel a lot better about giving starters days off when he's the replacement instead of the Nevins of the team.

They keep talking about how good he would be if he could hit .240.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Frobby said:

False.   Baseball has never changed, it’s a balance between what you contribute with your bat and your glove.  Bb-ref and Fangraphs both have Mateo in the 1.7-1.8 WAR range, above average for a major league starter at this point in the season.  That means his defensive contributions are outweighing his offensive failures.  So yes, being a Gold Glove defender can make up for being below average at the plate.   It’s a matter of just how many runs are being saved by the glove, and just how many runs are being lost with the bat. 

By the way, Rey Ordonez only had one season higher than 1.0 rWAR.   Mateo is contributing much more to the Orioles than Ordonez did to the Mets.  
 

In fairness this is the first real representation of Mateo as a full time starter and his defense has been an outlier compared to previous seasons. 

Who is a modern day comp to a defense first SS with comparable offensive productivity?

Mateo currently has the second most K's among SS's, and has the second worst OPS.

Edited by casadeozo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, casadeozo said:

In fairness this is the first real representation of Mateo as a full time starter and his defense has been an outlier compared to previous seasons. 

Who is a modern day comp to a defense first SS with comparable offensive productivity?

Mateo currently has the second most K's among SS's, and has the second worst OPS.

Adalberto Mondesi? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, casadeozo said:

In fairness this is the first real representation of Mateo as a full time starter and his defense has been an outlier compared to previous seasons. 

Who is a modern day comp to a defense first SS with comparable offensive productivity?

Mateo currently has the second most K's among SS's, and has the second worst OPS.

Nick Ahmed and Alcides Escobar are probably the best current comps.   Adam Everett was good comp about ten years ago.   

Look, my point is simple and consistent.   You judge a player by runs they contribute with their bat and take away with their glove.   The era doesn’t really matter.  It may change the baseline of what’s considered average production on each dimension.   But there always have been, and always will be, players who were legit major league starters despite being well below average offensively, because their above average defense made up for it.   This year, Jorge Mateo has been one of those players.   If his defense slips a bit and his offense doesn’t improve, then maybe he won’t be.   But right now, he is.  
 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

Nick Ahmed and Alcides Escobar are probably the best current comps.   Adam Everett was good comp about ten years ago.   

Look, my point is simple and consistent.   You judge a player by runs they contribute with their bat and take away with their glove.   The era doesn’t really matter.  It may change the baseline of what’s considered average production on each dimension.   But there always have been, and always will be, players who were legit major league starters despite being well below average offensively, because their above average defense made up for it.   This year, Jorge Mateo has been one of those players.   If his defense slips a bit and his offense doesn’t improve, then maybe he won’t be.   But right now, he is.  
 

Mateo is 14th of 30 shortstops (min 40 games) in rWAR. Someone might quibble about the defensive runs saved (I think DRS has him more highly rated than OAA, or at least with more runs saved).  But, arguably, Mateo has been an above-average MLB shortstop so far this year.

On the bb-ref list he's been more valuable than Wander Franco, Isiah Kiner-Falefa, Bo Bichette Bobby Witt, Elvis Andrus, Jose Iglesias and Brandon Crawford. Among others. Statcast has Mateo's glove as +13 compared to Bobby Witt's. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Posts

    • Just did a bit of a walk. Some decently large braches down, one segment of privacy fence missing and standing water on the property in a low spot.  
    • Just woke up and I don't hear any wind or rain.
    • Not that I am in any way full agreement, but this is a classic post.  Doesn't Machado play chess?  Maybe we could get some chess boards in the clubhouse and junk all the legos.  Not all great baseball men are John McGraw bad asses.  Some can be Christy Mathewsons as well, I suppose.  Not that I imagine today's young players much resembling McGraw or Mathewson, but they are the first two contrasting old school types that come to mind.  I will say just based on his postseason alone I'd much rather have Tatis over Machado.
    • Well I refuse to believe that only the O's have no players that want extensions.
    • Customer advocate groups have tried for decades to force the cable companies to allow channel by channel (a la carte) subscriptions, but the cable companies fought this because it would result in far less revenue (than forcing us to pay for a hundred channels we don't watch).  The government refused to intervene, so we've been stuck with the existing business model for all this time.  Streaming is forcing the change because streaming -- for now -- is an a la carte model.   MLB's fear must be this: if the regional sports network cable channel model goes away, will most users pay anywhere close to what these channels made as part of a cable bundle for just one streaming channel where all you watch are Orioles games (or maybe Orioles and Nats games -- whatever the case may be)?  So if you pay $100/month for cable with MASN, you are probably watching at least a few other channels too.  But will you pay $15/month (or whatever the price may be) just to watch the Orioles -- even during the months when there is no baseball?  The existing basic cable model has been quite stable because people tend to watch at least 5 or 6 channels.  They're reluctant to cancel their whole cable package just because baseball season is over -- or they've been too busy to watch many games this season.  But with a single streaming channel of just baseball there is bound to be a far more unstable revenue base.  All the streaming channels are already dealing with this problem.  I think MLB is maybe reluctant to go all in on streaming for this reason.  Perhaps they're looking for new different model that could allow them to bundle individual team channels with Netflix, or Prime, or maybe with your cell phone plan or something else.  This could give them some stability, but it could also be a turn off for the more hardcore fans who just want the Orioles and little else.  It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out and if MLB, and the Orioles, will prosper or suffer as a result.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...